Bolivia Decries Adoption of Copenhagen Accord II Without Consensus

December 11, 2010 (Cancun, Mexico) – The Plurinational State of Bolivia believes that the Cancun text is a hollow and false victory that was imposed without consensus, and its cost will be measured in human lives. History will judge harshly.

There is only one way to measure the success of a climate agreement, and that is based on whether or not it will effectively reduce emissions to prevent runaway climate change. This text clearly fails, as it could allow global temperatures to increase by more than 4 degrees, a level disastrous for humanity. Recent scientific reports show that 300,000 people already die each year from climate change-related disasters. This text threatens to increase the number of deaths annually to one million. This is something we can never accept.

Last year, everyone recognized that Copenhagen was a failure both in process and substance. Yet this year, a deliberate campaign to lower expectations and desperation for any agreement has led to one that in substance is little more than Copenhagen II.

A so-called victory for multilateralism is really a victory for the rich nations who bullied and cajoled other nations into accepting a deal on their terms. The richest nations offered us nothing new in terms of emission reductions or financing, and instead sought at every stage to backtrack on existing commitments, and include every loophole possible to reduce their obligation to act.

While developing nations – those that face the worst consequences of climate change – pleaded for ambition, we were instead offered the “realism” of empty gestures. Proposals by powerful countries like the US were sacrosanct, while ours were disposable. Compromise was always at the expense of the victims, rather than the culprits of climate change. When Bolivia said we did not agree with the text in the final hours of talks, we were overruled. An accord where only the powerful win is not a negotiation, it is an imposition.

Bolivia came to Cancun with concrete proposals that we believed would bring hope for the future. These proposals were agreed by 35,000 people in an historic World People’s Conference Cochabamba in April 2010. They seek just solutions to the climate crisis and address its root causes. In the year since Copenhagen, they were integrated into the negotiating text of the parties, and yet the Cancun text systematically excludes these voices. Bolivia cannot be convinced to abandon its principles or those of the peoples we represent. We will continue to struggle alongside affected communities worldwide until climate justice is achieved.

Bolivia has participated in these negotiations in good faith and the hope that we could achieve an effective climate deal. We were prepared to compromise on many things, except the lives of our people. Sadly, that is what the world’s richest nations expect us to do. Countries may try to isolate us for our position, but we come here in representation of the peoples and social movements who want real and effective action to protect the future of humanity and Mother Earth. We feel their support as our guide. History will be the judge of what has happened in Cancun.

5 comments

What were you prepared to compromise on, facing the opposition of all other nations? Will your result justify your negotiating posture? Will more lives be saved because you decided to hold to your principles no matter what the political reality you faced?

[…] on key issues of finance to its systematic exclusion of voices from developing countries. As a press statement from Bolivia put it: “Proposals by powerful countries like the US were sacrosanct, while ours were disposable. […]

THIS HAS BEEN “AWAITING MODERATION” SINCE DECEMBER 11, SO I’LL SLICE IT IN TWO AND HOPE FOR THE BEST. — kl

This is a tremendously clear and sentient summary!
What’s needed next is an analogous summary of the multi-national protesters’ activities outside the conference.
Mostly they should be commended for their earnestness but also informed of their shortcomings.
The protesters were too loyal to the carbon-only focus inside.
They should have complained enormously not only about carbon emissions but also those of aluminum and barium sprayed clandestinely in the atmosphere by several of the same rogue “developed” nations which so scoundrelously controlled the proceedings inside.
These sprayings have been massive and they’ve been happening for more than a decade now. They are called chemtrails. Please google to learn about them.
Among several fine chemtrails websites is http://www.carnicom.com–which is described as “An extensive website proving that chemtrails are a secret government conspiracy. CIA and military coverup.”
Chemtrails are bad news for farmers because they cause pockets of cool air which then combine with adjacent warm air to form storms containing huge temperature differences which bring much more frequent viciously destructive winds and floods.

The protesters outside also were too loyal to corporate interests inside which were urging solar and wind as green energies (on behalf of GE’s short-term profits?) instead of the greatly superior applications available now within the new-energy fields of zero point, cold fusion and advanced hydrogen.
These greatly superior energy benefits are being suppressed by the US (mainly via its Patent Office but also certain inventors have been murdered) in order to sustain the huge profits of King Cong: coal/oil/nuclear/gas. One fine site for information about this is http://www.pesn.com .
Finally, the protesters were too loyal to those inside who were suppressing any mention of weather warfare–for example, intentional droughts allowing banksters to buy farmland for a small fraction of its earlier value.
Yours for all our relations,
Keith Lampe aka Pondo and Ro-Non-So-Te
Co-founder, US environmental movement in
1969, Living Creatures Associates in 1972,
All-Species Projects in 1978 and founder, US
Pro-Democracy Movement in 1991
Vilcabamba, Ecuador

PS: Actually, there’s one contingent of protesters which can’t be called earnest because they’re secret agents of the Rockefeller Brothers. I refer of course to 350.org. There’s no gentler way to label them because on March 2, 2009 they accepted US$100,000 from the Rockefeller Brothers Fund and ever since then they have kept this a secret from their followers instead of explaining honestly why they were willing to take such a bribe.